header-logo header-logo

Improve time-setting & keep it brief, lawyers told

01 April 2022
Issue: 7974 / Categories: Legal News , Costs , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
Lawyers have been warned to give realistic time estimates for cases at the Commercial Court or risk them being relisted with consequent costs implications

In a Practice Note published this week, Mrs Justice Cockerill, Judge in charge of the Commercial Court, raised concerns about inadequate time estimates, particularly in longer applications and trials, and their effect on the conduct of hearings in the Commercial Court.

Cockerill J wrote: ‘In September 2020 HHJ Pelling QC and I raised concerns about the noticeable increase in the number of applications and trials for which inaccurate reading and hearing time estimates have been provided.

‘That Notice focussed particularly on the issue of half day hearings and it is fair to say that the Court has seen some improvement in relation to these shorter hearings. However, a considerable issue remains as regards longer applications and trials. In particular, the number of points and authorities being sought to be raised is often―and increasingly―completely out of step with the hearing time listed.

‘The result is that on a number of occasions counsel have either taken submissions at excessive speed… where experienced transcribers were unable to keep up with the pace of speech… or have sought to conduct legal argument by giving the judge a note of key passages in authorities which they would wish the judge to read and consider in depth after the completion of the hearing. These practices are unacceptable.’

Consequently, cases may be stood out either before the hearing or part heard and relisted with a more realistic time estimate.

For this, there may ‘also be costs consequences’, she warned.

Cockerill J also urged parties to carefully consider the number of points they run, ‘whether peripheral points will realistically lead anywhere if the primary points fail and which legal arguments are realistically open for argument at first instance’.

Read the PD here

Issue: 7974 / Categories: Legal News , Costs , Procedure & practice
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll